Flexible wings 2011

[Dragonfly]

Sorry JET. Find another kid to play with.

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

Its very ironic that the test 3.17 was drawn up to enforce the non flexing law 3.15 has ended up making it legal by 3.17, yet not by the main law of 3.15.

we then yesterday have a ban on EBD overuns to the max of 10%(how is that enforced)
And now suddenly its ok to race again.

What this shows is whoever is in charge of the rules at the FIA does not have a handle on how to enforce, nor write rules or even when to implement them. Is it any wonder people are getting so irate?

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

Sorry JET. Find another kid to play with.

Ahh no worries, enjoy playtime. See I would say that if the mid section remains 5cm's off the ground yet the wing tip scrapes the floor, that would be deemed as flexing.
Too much flexing as it happens.

[Richard]

So all the designers need to do is have a tea tray that deflects to the same extent as the wing, then the wing will appear to be stationary relative to the tea tray.

[Richard]

The simplest thing to do is have a homolgated spar running through the wing. Then the teams can add on their own aero appendages.

I'd also update the static deflections tests so they are carried out on the fully assembled car, thus checking there are no flexible bodywork connections

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

That would work Richard. At least it would shut me up!

[Tozza Mazza]

What they need is a distance sensor from the splitter to two points in the rear wing. say it cant move more than X amount at any point in the race, unless there's an accident and you lose a wing, which would give a large amount for X.

[Richard]

JET - it would be a wood spar of course, supplied by Mr E's favoured lumberjack in time honoured tradition.

Tozza - why bother with all that sensor complication when you can resolve the problem with a plank of wood?

[xpensive]

...
Or, increase the weight of the loadtest until we get over the downforce levels the cars get faced with at topspeed.
And add more points on the wing to distribute the load across the whole wing and finally placing the full load on the very edge of the FW.
...

Revolutionary.

Seriously, what you need to do is to add the horizontal load from drag, that's RBR's trick.

[Richard]

...
Or, increase the weight of the loadtest until we get over the downforce levels the cars get faced with at topspeed.
And add more points on the wing to distribute the load across the whole wing and finally placing the full load on the very edge of the FW.
...

Revolutionary

Wing breaking too. I hope Mr Whiting has a big broom for all the CF shards that will litter his garage.

[HampusA]

...................
if they get past that and still have a wing that flexes to much there will be further, more advanced tests but since the sensor test measures real world movement of the wing at top speed it should gives as very exact numbers on how much the wing flexes.

Now only if you could define for us, the mere mortals, how much is "too much" ...

did you blink during the first part of the post?

No more then 2cm under any circumstances.

[HampusA]

...
Or, increase the weight of the loadtest until we get over the downforce levels the cars get faced with at topspeed.
And add more points on the wing to distribute the load across the whole wing and finally placing the full load on the very edge of the FW.
...

Revolutionary.

Seriously, what you need to do is to add the horizontal load from drag, that's RBR's trick.

Well if you actually had read everything you would know that this new load test is option nr2

first one (in easy terms) mount a bar that goes from the front of the cockpit over the far end of the FW.
Put a sensor in both ends, measure while stationary, measure at top speed.
then we know exactly how much deflection the wing has.

And since there are videos showing some nose flex, position the bar from the front of the cockpit, out to the very tip of the nosecone and do the same tests again.

if it the pillars the flex inwards, put the bar on the side of the cockpit, let it go down to the pillars,
do the same test again.

this test would end all the talk about wings flexing more or less then allowed.
Fia's test seems to be invented around the same time the wheel was invented.

[HampusA]

Wing breaking too. I hope Mr Whiting has a big broom for all the CF shards that will litter his garage.

there seems to be a pattern here where people only read every other word, blink for 5 seconds then resume reading again.
or just nitpicking because they are bored.

bottom line is, making better tests and rules is Easy Peasy.

[HampusA]

JET - it would be a wood spar of course, supplied by Mr E's favoured lumberjack in time honoured tradition.

Tozza - why bother with all that sensor complication when you can resolve the problem with a plank of wood?

a plank of wood doesn't give you any information on how much a wing flex. it will only say that it has touched the ground.

[Richard]

It was just an observation that your static tests will break the wings.

tsk.. what was that about people not reading the post properly? ... try again ...

A homolgated spar running through the wing. Then the teams can add on their own aero appendages.

through = inside = internal